Why do Republicans want the worst for us when it comes to privacy issues?

Why do Republicans want the worst for us when it comes to privacy issues?

Other urls found in this thread:

eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/three-myths-telecom-industry-using-convince-congress-repeal-fccs-privacy-rules
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

They're fiscally conservative. They don't like regulations.

>That hand
hello pajeet

I've been looking up pros to this bullshit, i cannot find any pros to repealing this regulation. Is just just getting rid of regulation for the sake of getting rid of regulation? I don't get it

It's interesting to see the level of backlash against this versus the muted response to the repeated attempts to fuck people's privacy via copyright law during the Obama years. Maybe Trump is the lightning rod we need to get people to start paying attention to all the gross stuff that both parties do in exchange for bribes from big business.

SOPA?
PIPA?

...

They like money.

why does my god damn state keep voting in mcain fucking spics

>ted cruz
of course

Yes, and the reaction from the general public was a shrug of the shoulders.

It wasn't even that much.

Thanks for correcting the record shills, if stopped pirating your pedo cartoons you'd have nothing to worry about

Republicans and Democrats can be authoritarian or libertarian leaning too. Rand Paul wants privacy and he's a Republican. So does Bernie Sanders.

>fiscally conservative
>adding 10 trillion dollars to the debt after calling out Obama for the same thing

So, we can just buy those politicians data and publish it once this passes? I'm in.

>privacy issues
>ohnotheyllseemycp

get some priority in the issues of your life, there's worse problems than this

also neck yourself

>Rand Paul wants privacy

He's the one who sponsored the bill in the OP, you fucking retard. That's why his vote isn't on it or the abstain list.

The pros are only for the companies that give money to the politicians who vote for this legislation, not for us.

I want this reddit meme to go

Republicans aren't very smart people. Now that the government is actively working against free speech by monitoring what you do they feel ashamed for it and defend with memes.

Both parties tend to vote on partisan issues even if they don't understand it or agree with it.

You never vote across party lines, that's why you see zero democrats supporting the bill.
If this was a democrat sponsored attack on internet freedoms, you would see ONLY Ds on that list.

Fucking balkanize already

Name a benefit.

He cares about privacy from the government.

>repeal regulation that was passed 3 months ago
>oh no the world is over!

There is quite literally not one positive of this thing for the people of America. Not ONE.

you can find out if your neighbor is a kiddie fiddler

Why do Democrats want the worst for us when it comes to free speech issues?

Why do you care? Single liberals with no children have no future. You have no country. No tribe. No religion. Nothing but empty equality and individualist rhetoric.

You simply don't matter outside of being a consumer widget. That's why you have no privacy and all your data is sold. You are nothing but a collection of receipts.

Kill yourself.

What's this about?

Who are you quoting?

unfortunately, neither side cares about privacy.

patriot act started with bush, was met with little resistance. obama renewed it, trump hasn't said shit about it. nsa revelations didnt change much

america is forever fucked because muh terrorism

What is the origin of this meme? You morons do realize that ISPs aren't going to put up a public storefront where Joe Public can buy anyone's browsing history, right? They're going to sell it to advertisers, ten million records at a time.

shut up ctr cuck

>that damage control

Don't believe that any government, or large organization in general actually, wants anything other than the worst for you when it comes to privacy issues.

MUH FREEZE PEACHES

>it's a Sup Forums gets their histories purchased and published episode

Can you describe these issues you're talking about?

>Sup Forumstards can no longer get jobs because their employers will purchase their browsing history and no one wants to employ Sup Forumstards
Only good thing that will come of it.

>Sup Forumstards have jobs
good one

If you really cared about security and privacy you would not rely on government regulations passed 3 months ago to protect you.

>Implying child fuckers won't just use a VPN/Tor.

This does nothing for stopping CP other than catching idiots using the clear net. I and just about everyone else don't have a choice when it comes to ISP policies since you're often limited to one. The "Google and Facebook collect your shit, why shouldn't they?" argument doesn't float either, since you can block all cookies/js/localStorage from their domains of you so choose. The fact that we're paying for a lousy service that has a virtual monopoly on what we can do selling our info without our explicit consent should trouble the shit out of everyone who even thinks for a second that we should have some right to communicate without our traffic being used to sell a specific profile.

The difference between whats happening now and SOPA/PIPA was that SOPA/PIPA was going to hurt big companies profits, so they clearly protested in
Meanwhile removing this regulation will make them money, so of course they aren't going to protest it

can they sell your search history retroactively, or only things you've searched since the bill came into effect?

>muh terrorism
And muh pedos. Eternal argument.

Seeing as all this bill does is repeal restrictions added 3 months ago, they can sell all your search history from before December 2016.

help catch terrorists and political dissenters

Funny how republicans are supposed to be the small government party

it's not going to have your names on it you fucking mongs

They worship power.

For them, having money and power means they're right.

sauce?

this

it will be "users who browse Sup Forums bought X" -> advertise X on Sup Forums

So regulations are now a small government thing?

common fucking sense jesus christ why do i even need to explain this

you think advertisers give a shit about YOU personally? pro tip: they don't

they want to see the big data and big trends so they know what ad space to buy on which sites

America is made great again

protip: the republicans also want to allow DNA testing as a condiction for employment

it's "just advertising" now, later it will be equivalent to a credit score or a background check

You really can't even bother to read the original bills to form your own opinion but instead just parrot whatever fake news headline you find?

good

tired of nogs doing a shitty ass job when i order fast food

I'm more concerned about companies buying that information for background checks

>fake news

That's good I don't want to waste my time hiring and training someone who will die of cancer in the next 4 months.

She got $700k...

it isn't even possible to use this data in that way

The reasonings behind most senators votes is that they don't want the FCC but the FTC in change. I really don't get this meme, liberals are pretty retarded it seems.

People who would almost certainly be negatively affected by it and the ones agreeing with it.

Really gets the grey matter moving.

Nice tinfoil hat

Yup, at the same time we should ban background checks and drug tests. Those are racist.

no we should ban them because they're regulations :^)

What are regulations? Show me one regulation forcing private employers to perform background check on candidates.

>And muh pedos
nah, that one is going to be a-okay in a few years with the direction that the left is going in, as long as you're a look, but don't touch pedophile for the first 10 years or so.

That's because the FTC is has a bigger backlog than someone who browses Sup Forums. It would be okay if the FTC were actually funded like it should be, but ISP's are banking on the fact that all but the most egregious complaints will be stuck in a bureaucratic purgatory behind other issues.

ok, what about our children? our troops fighting for this great nation. god wouldn't approve of this

:^)

>le America is le Christian nations
>le our troops meme
>:^)
kill yourself

So where are the regulations?

it's an issue of national security, we can't let the terrorists win : ^ )

...

>muh straw man

>le America is le Christian nations
It objectively is.

Nice try false flagging and deflecting the topic. How are background checks a government regulation?

they aren't, I'm a huge gigantic faggot for bringing that up

t. the poster you just replied to

Amount of mad, single white boys in this thread is hitting critical mass.

Before the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was the primary regulator of companies' privacy and data security practices. The FTC had the authority to bring enforcement actions against companies who engaged in "unfair and deceptive practices." The 2015 reclassification of broadband providers removed internet service providers (ISPs) from the FTC's jurisdiction. On April 20, 2016, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposed a rule applying privacy requirements of the Communications Act to Internet Service Providers (ISPs). However, the proposed rule would not apply to edge providers and web sites, like Facebook and Twitter, since they still fall under the FTC's authority.
As you know, Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona introduced S.J. Res. 34 on March 7, 2017. This resolution would repeal the FCC's privacy rules. I do not believe a two-track system in which the FCC regulates ISPs while the FTC monitors the rest of the internet ecosystem is good for consumers. For this reason I cosponsored S.J. Res 34.

>b-but muh evil Republican trying to kill le free internet!!

>protip: the republicans also want to allow DNA testing as a condiction for employment

Damn this is happening to your as well?

In Canada the government recently refused to add DNA profiling to a list of things illegal for an employer to do. Kind of ominous that anyone would be against that.

I don't get it

This will repeal policies added 3 months ago. Was it that big of a deal that we didn't have these protections prior to that?

> Implying the FTC will ever regulate this, good one.

The fake news articles on this don't mention that.

I don't think is about "want the worst for us when it comes to privacy issues" One of the biggest markets right now is sadly personal data selling and the major players are Google and Facebook, that's how they get their profits right.

So the ISP seeing this is a hot market also want to get in that business so they bribe (a.k.a lobbying) Republicans so that the Republicans can have an excuse of "cutting regulations" and ISP can get more profits.

Sadly, the Democrats isn't caring about your privacy at all they were just bribed by the major players like Google and Facebook to vote no.

In summary, this bill is not about regulations and not about privacy is about who can continue selling your personal data for profit.

The general public.

Why trust in government regulations to guarantee your privacy to begin with? Telecoms companies and tech companies both have a history of flouting them, and a financial incentive to do so. Better to use technical means (VPNs, Tor, etc) to stop your ISP from being able to see what you're doing online at all.

This desu. It wasn't the fucking end of the world big brother situation before 3 months ago so why would it now? Nobody gives a fuck about your porno addiction

We did, until they took them away from the FTC and gave them to the FCC with this bill. Now nobody is overseeing it.

Problem is more so that we are now establishing that this is perfectly legal and no longer a legally grey area.
The only reason it wasn't a problem before was because companies did things reasonably and sought not to step on any toes when it came to selling information, considering a class action against them from a huge group of pissed off people could be dangerous. So it was more of a problem for the companies that they didn't know what could happen if they went off the rails with what they had. An individual getting mad wouldn't matter so much, but a solid 5000 people pissed off with numerous connections, media time, and lawyer money is a bad look.

Now that they can do whatever with the information, they don't need to worry about people banding together and standing up to them.

The regulation gave it to the FCC, this bill fags are crying about gives it back to the FTC

Wrong.
eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/three-myths-telecom-industry-using-convince-congress-repeal-fccs-privacy-rules

>pros
government shrinks
>cons
nothing else matters

It keeps government hands out of the cookie jar in a matter that ISPs already don't give a fuck about.

In this day and age of encryption, so much of Average Joe's info is inadvertently secured that collecting any meaningful insight will not be worth the millions you'd have to dump into it.

Advertising rules all in user data collection and nothing will come close to it in our lifetimes.

>EFF
Fake news

eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/three-myths-telecom-industry-using-convince-congress-repeal-fccs-privacy-rules
>The 2016 FTC v AT&T Mobility decision at the 9th Circuit eliminated the Federal Trade Commission’s authority to enforce privacy rules on ISPs in Arizona, Alaska, Hawaii, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. Other courts may do the same. And while some states’ Attorney Generals have brought actions against ISPs that mislead or deceive consumers about how the companies collect, share, and sell customer data, many other states have scaled back their enforcement on the premise that federal enforcement was sufficient and preferable.

>ad by a VPN company to scare people to buy more VPNs
How is this legal?